Legod Third Coming

It's a valid point but actually is a result of Rupert playing Lowe (sic) salaries and then supplementing them with appearance fees. Hard as it sounds, I think our players were underpaid compared to other clubs so had to have their salaries topped up this way! It was Rupert's way of encouraging the club to play its youngsters whom he hoped would keep the senior players out on ability and form, as well as cost I am sure. Much as you and I agree on their respective worth...

Well not in the Northam obviously. Last time I saw someone sitting in there was after we were relegated from the Premiership

I actually agree with you 100% on this. My problem is that, as yet, we have no idea whether Pardew is a good manager and painful as it may be, we simply have to allow him the opportunity to show us whether he is good or bad. And that cannot be 9 games in anyone's book!!

I agree John, but none of the managers you mention should ever have been appointed. I'll tell you something for nothing John. I bet Phill Brown will be the next manager to be fired - I give it a couple of weeks. The pattern is so predictable... Good managers don't become bad overnight, they really don't! And I wonder how much better some of those managers' Directors/Chairmen would be if they simply redoubled their resolve rather than reaching for the revolver!

Which is probably why 606 was fully of tractor boys actually supporting their manager. Managers are not idiots, they know they are under pressure and that every defeat simply excacerbates the pressure. What they need - what every new entrant in every job needs anywhere - is the support of those around them and the tools to do the job effectively. It's not rocket science is it.

And there my friend the nail is hit firmly on the head. If a manager inherits players that he does not really 'want' he ends up ruining them and the team by perennially playing them out of position. The reality of our situation was a rag-bag of players acquired through different managers with different agendas and tactics, over a ludicrously short period. No manager gets to buy an entire squad (well Hughes and Mourinho apart) but it is little surprise that those given most time - the Curbishleys at Charlton, the Allerdyces at Bolton, etc do tend to outperform in the long run those who have little time (or at least those with little time on limited rather than unlimited budgets). It stands to reason doesn't it? It provides the opportunity to manage players into and out of the side and to replace them either through the ranks or through loans and purchases. What we need like a hole in the head is to create yet another bloated crew of players who aren't selected to any system, tactics or style - just selected by different managers firing into the wilderness...

Been around the sea DD?

Everything I wanted as a fan, I now have. Rather than selling players we are buying the best players. Rather than having an idiot coach promoted beyond his ability, we have a proven expensive manager. Rather than debt, we have money. Rather than a focus on anything but football, we focus everything on the first team. If this doesn't work I will give up going to football for life. You are right, if we had access to money after 2003, right now we could be sat where Aston Villa are. We still might be, it's just five years away.

This post should be nailed to the site masthead. Lowe's failing - lack of stability. Now called for by those who campaigned and boycotted to have him removed. You couldn't make it up.

Because they know Mourinho is needed to win the Premiership. Simples.

Well things certainly picked up under Wotte alright... What has last season got to do with this? Why can you not forget it and move on?? This season: a) are we leaving our best players out? b) selling the only talent we have? c) operating under a manager with no experience in the UK? d) playing scholars and the youth team... Last year is gone. We have one or two players left in the team from that era who may make the grade. If they don't come January we'll buy replacements for them. It really is quite simple.

Stability is common where the manager succeeds. The challenge is to allow the manager the time to determine whether he will or will not succeed. I think if you anlyse this League, you will find that the top three managers are all in their second season. Parkinson has been at Charlton for what 2/3 season including as assistant to Pardew. Grayson's first games in charge of Leeds helped them miss promotion last season....

We finished 11th. The previous season 15th. Sadly I can't tell you where we were after 10 games under WGS. I can tell you he achieved 45 points. The previous season we had 44.

There are more examples of clubs changing manager and getting worse is what the study showed. Of course failing managers are replaced. You have no idea whether Pardew could be our club's most or least successful manager after nine games. That's the whole fecking point.

These teams are comparable by standard. The point is, it was after one year that we started winning under Strachan and had a great season, not nine games. You understand that do you??

Seriously???

When you actually look through results for that season apart from the odd highlight we were really poor. We finished on 45 points (in 11th granted). We won 12 fecking games... But by golly what a season in 2003... the year later.

Not by the standards of the Premiership at the time. Strachan spent a club record 4m on Delap didn't he??

Er, because they let their manager go 22 games without a win maybe?

Saints 3 Ipswich 3 Fulham 2 Saints 1 Saints 1 Blackburn 2 Derby 1 Saints 0 Saints 1 Charlton 0 Everton 2 Saints 0 Leicester 0 Saints 4 Saints 2 Sunderland 0 United 6 Saints 1 Saints 0 Leeds 1 Strachan's first ten games in charge. What do you see? We managed to win three games and accrue 10 points. Something else. We couldn't beat any decent teams. We beat three teams, Leicester would go on to be relegated (finish bottom on 28 points), Sunderland who finished 4th bottom and Charlton who finished 6th bottom and lost at home to Leeds (finished 5th) and Blackburn (finished 10th). Does that help any of those reaching for the noose? Looks to me a lot like our start this season... Oh and on Saturday Pardew could have more points from his first ten games than Strachan, well feck me

History does not not show that. The only research ever done into this subject to my knowledge showed that changing manager more often results in worse performances than better by a small percentage. What history tells us that successful managers stay in jobs longer and therefore those clubs that are most successful have had managers in post for longer periods on the whole - it's a self fulfilling prophecy. What WE need is what we have - a PLAN. And it's about fecking time we stuck to one for a change. The two most succesful spells in this club's history can be found when we had managers for longest... That is not to say you hold onto a manager forever in the hope he eventually succeeds but any judgement made after 9 games is at best premature, no??

9 games. Simples.

I don't think relegation is on the cards if we continue to improve. People who bang on about our points per game ratio forget who we have played. Take at look at the difference in the stats in last night's programme between the teams we have played and those who Bristol had played. We have had some tough games thus far in terms of League position and form - as it turns out!! A point against Colchester didn't look any great shakes and then they thump Charlton 3-0!! By the end of October we will have a much better indication of where our relative position is. Losing to a team third in the league, who had won 6 of their 8 games before last night is not a reason for despair is it?? Especially not if you can point to areas of failure and identify ways to fix them.

I must be joining the lunatic fringe as I find myself agreeing with one of your posts...

As I said somewhere else, I am pretty sure either Pardew had briefed him to have a more fluid role or he and Papa were swapping for fun, because they both seemed to be on opposite sides of the pitch for spells... agree about Holmes though. I thnk if he's fit he has to start.